6 ms·

The line should be drawn by the owner of the device. As the user and owner of the product, I should be the sole decider about my own security posture, not some

The line should be drawn by the owner of the device. As the user and owner of the product, I should be the sole decider about my own security posture, not some company who doesn’t know my use case or needs. It’s crazy how we’ve managed to normalize the manufacturer making these kinds of blanket decisions on our behalf.

vlovich123 1y ago
How does Apple know the owner of the product has authorized the HW change? There’s a secondary argument you could make here whereby because the replacements must be valid Apple parts that have uniform behavior and tolerances, the strength of the secondary market is stronger and Apple products have a stronger resale value as a result, because you’re not going to encounter a MacBook with an arbitrary part replaced that you as the second-hand buyer know nothing about (this is why the secondary market for cars doesn’t work without the ability to lookup the car history by VIN).
- userbinator 1y ago
  Apple doesn't need to know. Once it's sold Apple is no longer the owner.
  - aurareturn 1y ago
    What happens when you indirectly cause the machine to fail by installing some shout 3rd party part? Are you still going to claim warranty? Walk into an Apple Store to ask for help?
    - userbinator 1y ago
      We have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty... to rely on.
      - aurareturn 1y ago
        Huh? Explain more.
        rcxdude 1y ago
        Generally speaking companies are not liable for failures due to the customer's own modifications to the product.
        kube-system 1y ago
        Practically speaking, however, they are liable for the time to service those customers and diagnose product issues to determine that the customer was at fault. And, that extends to any future buyers of used devices. And, any resulting displeasure from customers, even though it wasn't Apple's fault. These sorts of things are exactly the types of problems that exist in the used car market, for exactly the same reasons.
        aurareturn 1y ago
        Yep. That’s why I think Apple tends to lock down their spare parts.
  - fastball 1y ago
    What about a work computer? You're not the owner, but presumably you appreciate when can feel that your work computer is still secure.
    - userbinator 1y ago
      If it's owned by the company then I don't care what they do since that's no longer my responsibility.
  - kube-system 1y ago
    And when Apple designed their products, they get to decide how to design it. You can do whatever you want with your computer. But nobody has to design it the way you like it.
- doubled112 1y ago
  That car comparison doesn't work here. You can't be sure about the true history of a car, only what was reported. When I replace a wheel bearing assembly in my driveway, you still can't see that by looking up my VIN. Nobody knows except myself and the person I bought the parts from. Was it a dealer part? An OEM part? A poor quality replacement? Can't tell without looking. This might actually support Apple's side of the argument, although I do not. I don't think we need some Carfax equivalent for MacBooks.
  - chongli 1y ago
    This might actually support Apple's side of the argument, although I do not. I don't think we need some Carfax equivalent for MacBooks. In some ways, Apple's scheme is better than Carfax. In other ways, it's worse. It's worse because you can't get access to the repair history of a device. It's better because you can actually have a reasonable degree of confidence that no "driveway repairs" have taken place since Apple's scheme is not known to be broken.
    - buzzerbetrayed 1y ago
      This is my biggest complaint with the strict "my device, my rules" people. I want Apple to lock down my device to customization, repairs, etc.. I know I am never going to install an app through means other than the app store, even if I could. I know I'm never going to repair my device through anyone other than Apple, even if I could. I want to know that my device will be a $1,000 paperweight to anyone who steals it. I want to pay Apple to ensure there are no "driveway repairs". A number of years ago I accidentally ended up with a second hand iPhone with a shitty "fake" screen repair. I had no way of knowing it wasn't an Apple screen. But it fucked me over as soon as it started failing a couple months after I bought it. I get tired of the people demanding that a company, with willing, paying customers, isn't allowed to protect their customers because they want something the company doesn't offer. Fuck right off with that shit and buy from a company that does offer that.
      - worthless-trash 1y ago
- N19PEDL2 1y ago
  It wouldn't be difficult for Apple to add a page in the device settings that shows whether the device contains any non-genuine components.
clickety_clack 1y ago
Yes it’s wild. Imagine if we decided that people can’t be relied on to install good locks for their doors, so we gave the government responsibility for locking and unlocking your door every time you wanted to leave your house. A lid sensor is just so peripheral. Where do the vendor lock-ins end?
- Configure0251 1y ago
  I quite like this analogy, I hope I can remember it for the appropriate moment.
- jbs789 1y ago
  You mean like a prison?
- floatrock 1y ago
  I dislike Apple's lock-in tactics, but I dislike gross fear-mongering exaggerations even more. How'd we get to tyrannical government oversight from shitty corporate control? Sorry, I think I slipped on that slippery slope. The better analogy would be "door lock vendor requires you to buy their door frame to make their door lock work with the security guarantees you chose to buy into." Government should stay out of our private lives, but this kind of jumpy fear-mongering is what makes people lose focus, and when people are run by fear that's when the real psychopaths start taking advantage. Your fear mongering is creating the very government tyranny you're mongering about.
- kube-system 1y ago
  Apple is a vendor, not a government. A more accurate analogy, is like a lock installed on your door by a locksmith that uses proprietary parts available only through locksmiths. Which is exactly how a lot of locks work. Proprietary technology exists in a lot of places, Apple didn't invent this.
  - autoexec 1y ago
    > Apple is a vendor, not a government. Apple is worse than a government. They have more money and reach than many governments and unlike many government officials, the public doesn't have the power to vote the heads of apple out of office or vote for who they want as a replacement. Apple didn't invent proprietary technology, but they leverage the shit out of it in consumer hostile ways just to take even more money from people.
tpmoney 1y ago
> As the user and owner of the product, I should be the sole decider about my own security posture, not some company who doesn’t know my use case or needs. It's not so cut and dry though. The "user" and the "owner" of a product are not always the same person, but hardware security impacts the "user" more than the "owner".
amrocha 1y ago
Does your grandma decide her own “security posture”? Does she even know what that means?
- smaudet 1y ago
  Your grandma is not the target of state level spy rings... The noise made about security is absolutely ridiculous.
  - swiftcoder 1y ago
    She is however the target of pretty much every financial scam on the planet, many of which rely on convincing folks to hand over the keys to their (digital) castle...
    - eviks 1y ago
      Which financial scams involve such attacks, so is there a single scam that this measure would prevent?
      - swiftcoder 1y ago
        I'm not aware of any that this particular sensor would mitigate. I think the idea that security is only for people targeted by nation-states is not a realistic view of the modern world (and, moreover, if we decide that normal people don't need enhanced security measures, it becomes trivial to identify dissidents by the fact that they implement security measures).
  - amrocha 1y ago
    State hacking tech leaks to average hackers and scammers over time. Scammers today are using nation state tech from a decade ago.
- deadfoxygrandpa 1y ago
  both my grandmothers are dead
isaacremuant 1y ago
It's not that crazy when people seem to cheer for a nanny state at every turn. Specially if said nanny state bombards them with propaganda about all the dangers they'll face if they just don't "comply". 1984 references may have seen farfetched but after the suppression of rights using covid as an excuse people have little to no recourse to claim control back. Apple was always famous for their walled garden and tight control, but we have Google becoming like apple (can't install things in your device unless you go to them with your private details), ID to track your movements because "protect the children" (effectively blocking news even), chat control (very similar to installing a camera in your home and recording all your conversations). Corps and governments are relying on each other to strengthen their control and it's not a surprise.
jbs789 1y ago
You do get to decide (buy another product with a different value proposition).

vlovich123 1y ago

How does Apple know the owner of the product has authorized the HW change? There’s a secondary argument you could make here whereby because the replacements must be valid Apple parts that have uniform behavior and tolerances, the strength of the secondary market is stronger and Apple products have a stronger resale value as a result, because you’re not going to encounter a MacBook with an arbitrary part replaced that you as the second-hand buyer know nothing about (this is why the secondary market for cars doesn’t work without the ability to lookup the car history by VIN).

userbinator 1y ago
Apple doesn't need to know. Once it's sold Apple is no longer the owner.
- aurareturn 1y ago
  What happens when you indirectly cause the machine to fail by installing some shout 3rd party part? Are you still going to claim warranty? Walk into an Apple Store to ask for help?
  - userbinator 1y ago
    We have the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magnuson%E2%80%93Moss_Warranty... to rely on.
    - aurareturn 1y ago
      Huh? Explain more.
      - rcxdude 1y ago
        Generally speaking companies are not liable for failures due to the customer's own modifications to the product.
        kube-system 1y ago
        Practically speaking, however, they are liable for the time to service those customers and diagnose product issues to determine that the customer was at fault. And, that extends to any future buyers of used devices. And, any resulting displeasure from customers, even though it wasn't Apple's fault. These sorts of things are exactly the types of problems that exist in the used car market, for exactly the same reasons.
        aurareturn 1y ago
        Yep. That’s why I think Apple tends to lock down their spare parts.
- fastball 1y ago
  What about a work computer? You're not the owner, but presumably you appreciate when can feel that your work computer is still secure.
  - userbinator 1y ago
    If it's owned by the company then I don't care what they do since that's no longer my responsibility.
- kube-system 1y ago
  And when Apple designed their products, they get to decide how to design it. You can do whatever you want with your computer. But nobody has to design it the way you like it.
doubled112 1y ago
That car comparison doesn't work here. You can't be sure about the true history of a car, only what was reported. When I replace a wheel bearing assembly in my driveway, you still can't see that by looking up my VIN. Nobody knows except myself and the person I bought the parts from. Was it a dealer part? An OEM part? A poor quality replacement? Can't tell without looking. This might actually support Apple's side of the argument, although I do not. I don't think we need some Carfax equivalent for MacBooks.
- chongli 1y ago
  This might actually support Apple's side of the argument, although I do not. I don't think we need some Carfax equivalent for MacBooks. In some ways, Apple's scheme is better than Carfax. In other ways, it's worse. It's worse because you can't get access to the repair history of a device. It's better because you can actually have a reasonable degree of confidence that no "driveway repairs" have taken place since Apple's scheme is not known to be broken.
  - buzzerbetrayed 1y ago
    This is my biggest complaint with the strict "my device, my rules" people. I want Apple to lock down my device to customization, repairs, etc.. I know I am never going to install an app through means other than the app store, even if I could. I know I'm never going to repair my device through anyone other than Apple, even if I could. I want to know that my device will be a $1,000 paperweight to anyone who steals it. I want to pay Apple to ensure there are no "driveway repairs". A number of years ago I accidentally ended up with a second hand iPhone with a shitty "fake" screen repair. I had no way of knowing it wasn't an Apple screen. But it fucked me over as soon as it started failing a couple months after I bought it. I get tired of the people demanding that a company, with willing, paying customers, isn't allowed to protect their customers because they want something the company doesn't offer. Fuck right off with that shit and buy from a company that does offer that.
    - worthless-trash 1y ago
N19PEDL2 1y ago
It wouldn't be difficult for Apple to add a page in the device settings that shows whether the device contains any non-genuine components.

clickety_clack 1y ago

Yes it’s wild. Imagine if we decided that people can’t be relied on to install good locks for their doors, so we gave the government responsibility for locking and unlocking your door every time you wanted to leave your house. A lid sensor is just so peripheral. Where do the vendor lock-ins end?

Configure0251 1y ago
I quite like this analogy, I hope I can remember it for the appropriate moment.
jbs789 1y ago
You mean like a prison?
floatrock 1y ago
I dislike Apple's lock-in tactics, but I dislike gross fear-mongering exaggerations even more. How'd we get to tyrannical government oversight from shitty corporate control? Sorry, I think I slipped on that slippery slope. The better analogy would be "door lock vendor requires you to buy their door frame to make their door lock work with the security guarantees you chose to buy into." Government should stay out of our private lives, but this kind of jumpy fear-mongering is what makes people lose focus, and when people are run by fear that's when the real psychopaths start taking advantage. Your fear mongering is creating the very government tyranny you're mongering about.
kube-system 1y ago
Apple is a vendor, not a government. A more accurate analogy, is like a lock installed on your door by a locksmith that uses proprietary parts available only through locksmiths. Which is exactly how a lot of locks work. Proprietary technology exists in a lot of places, Apple didn't invent this.
- autoexec 1y ago
  > Apple is a vendor, not a government. Apple is worse than a government. They have more money and reach than many governments and unlike many government officials, the public doesn't have the power to vote the heads of apple out of office or vote for who they want as a replacement. Apple didn't invent proprietary technology, but they leverage the shit out of it in consumer hostile ways just to take even more money from people.

tpmoney 1y ago

> As the user and owner of the product, I should be the sole decider about my own security posture, not some company who doesn’t know my use case or needs. It's not so cut and dry though. The "user" and the "owner" of a product are not always the same person, but hardware security impacts the "user" more than the "owner".

amrocha 1y ago

Does your grandma decide her own “security posture”? Does she even know what that means?

smaudet 1y ago
Your grandma is not the target of state level spy rings... The noise made about security is absolutely ridiculous.
- swiftcoder 1y ago
  She is however the target of pretty much every financial scam on the planet, many of which rely on convincing folks to hand over the keys to their (digital) castle...
  - eviks 1y ago
    Which financial scams involve such attacks, so is there a single scam that this measure would prevent?
    - swiftcoder 1y ago
      I'm not aware of any that this particular sensor would mitigate. I think the idea that security is only for people targeted by nation-states is not a realistic view of the modern world (and, moreover, if we decide that normal people don't need enhanced security measures, it becomes trivial to identify dissidents by the fact that they implement security measures).
- amrocha 1y ago
  State hacking tech leaks to average hackers and scammers over time. Scammers today are using nation state tech from a decade ago.
deadfoxygrandpa 1y ago
both my grandmothers are dead

isaacremuant 1y ago

It's not that crazy when people seem to cheer for a nanny state at every turn. Specially if said nanny state bombards them with propaganda about all the dangers they'll face if they just don't "comply". 1984 references may have seen farfetched but after the suppression of rights using covid as an excuse people have little to no recourse to claim control back. Apple was always famous for their walled garden and tight control, but we have Google becoming like apple (can't install things in your device unless you go to them with your private details), ID to track your movements because "protect the children" (effectively blocking news even), chat control (very similar to installing a camera in your home and recording all your conversations). Corps and governments are relying on each other to strengthen their control and it's not a surprise.

jbs789 1y ago

You do get to decide (buy another product with a different value proposition).